From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-26 671dc5a: Fix calls to buffer modification hooks from replace-buffer-contents Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2018 21:54:46 +0300 Message-ID: <836018xvux.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20180721180616.6608.26581@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20180721180618.5CEA9208D4@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <83bmb0xxcy.fsf@gnu.org> <838t64xwqe.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1532199169 17881 195.159.176.226 (21 Jul 2018 18:52:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2018 18:52:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 21 20:52:44 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fgwzj-0004Z2-Se for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Jul 2018 20:52:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53669 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fgx1q-0006Pa-R9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Jul 2018 14:54:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56304) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fgx1k-0006Oy-K9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Jul 2018 14:54:49 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fgx1f-0007lI-Ni for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Jul 2018 14:54:48 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:36167) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fgx1f-0007lC-Jw; Sat, 21 Jul 2018 14:54:43 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1381 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fgx1e-0001Dv-Vo; Sat, 21 Jul 2018 14:54:43 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Sat, 21 Jul 2018 14:44:54 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:227639 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2018 14:44:54 -0400 > > >> I don't understand enough of the code to have an opinion on it, but the > >> comments describe a behavior which would be wrong: both before-c-f and > >> after-c-f- need to be run for any buffer change, even if it's only an > >> insertion or only a deletion. > > What if there's no change at all, i.e. no deletions and no insertions? > > Then you can either run neither of the hooks, or both. How can we determine whether to run neither or not? I can easily run both, but is that TRT? It was you who requested not to run the hooks on a range that is larger than we can determine by looking at the results of compareseq. > > You did read the bug report, didn't you? Because unless I completely > > misunderstand what you are saying, you are not describing the bug's > > recipe. > > Yes, I did. All I read in the report seems fine, and your commit > message sounds right as well. But the comments seem to describe an > incorrect behavior. The recipe describes a case where "foo" is replaced by "foo", and the code in compareseq tells us not to change anything. There are no deletions and no insertions. Do we call the modification hooks in this case?